From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Northup v. Taylor

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Nov 23, 2016
2:14-cv-01639-PK (D. Or. Nov. 23, 2016)

Opinion

2:14-cv-01639-PK

11-23-2016

JOSEPH D. NORTHUP, Petitioner, v. JERI TAYLOR, Respondent.


ORDER

BROWN, Judge.

Magistrate Judge Paul Papak issued Findings and Recommendation (#51) on August 8, 2016, in which he recommends the Court deny Petitioner Joseph C. Northrup's Petition (#2) for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, dismiss this matter with prejudice, and deny a certificate of appealability. Petitioner filed timely Objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). See also Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)(en banc).

In his Objections Petitioner relies on the arguments contained in his Petition, Brief in Support of Petition, and Reply to Response to Petition. Petitioner, pro se, also filed a Supplemental Objections/Made in Affidavit Form (#56) in support of his Objections. This Court has carefully considered Petitioner's Objections and Supplemental Objections filed pro se and concludes they do not provide a basis to modify the Findings and Recommendation. The Court also has reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and does not find any error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Papak's Findings and Recommendation (#51) and, therefore, DENIES Petitioner's Petition (#2) for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, DISMISSES this matter with prejudice, and DENIES a certificate of appealability on the basis that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 23rd day of November, 2016.

s/ Anna J. Brown

ANNA J. BROWN

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Northup v. Taylor

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Nov 23, 2016
2:14-cv-01639-PK (D. Or. Nov. 23, 2016)
Case details for

Northup v. Taylor

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH D. NORTHUP, Petitioner, v. JERI TAYLOR, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Nov 23, 2016

Citations

2:14-cv-01639-PK (D. Or. Nov. 23, 2016)